Sara H wrote:This is an excerpt of some comments by Rev. Master Daishin Morgan, the Abbot of Throssel Hole, in response to that thread:...

and here is an excerpt from Baran's response to that:

I did NOT make up that at one point everyone in the Abbey became part of her fantasies about Jesus and Mary and Judas. And absolutely she claimed to have been St. John of the Cross and Bodhidharma. Later, even she realized how wacko the whole visualizations had become and she and Daizui changed or edited the story. All good mythology needs editors. And, yes, by the time I left, the drama had calmed down.

I shared the three dimes story because it was a good example of Kennett's mindset. Believe me, she wasn't joking. She wasn't lighthearted. She wasn't just saying, "keep in touch." There were so many other examples of her demonizing people who left, predicting bad things would happen, making leave-taking so painful and dramatic. There is no surprise here.

It is certainly possible that she thought she was doing something clever when she gave me the dimes - or she might have decided it was some kind of zen compassionate act. That doesn't make it any less distorted and outright mean. She was lost in her own grandiose fantasy so anything is possible.

In Kennett's mind, she could never, ever do anything "wrong" - so of course, she cast the story as -- Josh has misunderstood. That's the grand story. of not only Shasta, but many small cultic organizations. Teacher = perfect and always in the right / light. Followers = confused, ignorant, wrong, feelings not only don't matter, it's just their koan, their impediments. That's why I left. This is a very harmful story.

By the way, it was just her and me in the room, as far as I remember. So whatever any account you heard of this -- it must have come from her.

Through Dzogchen we can really understand what God is and we don’t have to worry if there is a God or not. God always exists as our real nature, the base, for everybody. - Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

Well, you know, whether he thinks she made a mistake or not in that, she's allowed to make a mistake. (Or was as she's dead)

Zen masters are human beings, and whether she used a used the right approach or not there (and it's possible it was the right approach) she's still allowed to make mistakes.

This practice is not for people who want flawless human beings for masters.

It's for people who want people for masters. People who are human and do make mistakes.

So regardless of who was in the right, or who was in the wrong in this particular case, the point is moot, because people are allowed to make mistakes.

Also, if a mistake is made, taking responsibility for a mistake does not mean subjecting yourself to every whim another person wants, just because they may have been effected by it or not.

People can be very unreasonable.(And if a person is dead, it's unreasonable to demand that the people who inherited that person's organization, try and make amends for some private disagreement that they were not privy to. They had nothing to do with it. Some of them wern't even in the organization then. And so constantly berating the point is kindof useless, as it's all he-said, she-said, at that point. The OBC in this regard, has made many overtures to try and adress real concerns that people on there had, and most of them have been turned down, or slapped away. They're more interested in fighting on there, than they are in actually solving any problem. It's become a soap opera over what so-and-so might have said to someone else back in the seventies. Not really a real concern or adressing greviance base.)

In Gassho,

Sara.

"Life is full of suffering. AND Life is full of the EternalIT IS OUR CHOICEWe can stand in our shadow, and wallow in the darkness, ORWe can turn around.It is OUR choice." -Rev. Basil Singer

" ...out of fear, even the good harm one another. " -Rev. Dazui MacPhillamy

The matter of a private mistake, an isolated incident, is not at issue (if I understand Josh Baran and others correctly). It is the patterns of behavior and institutional problems that followed from it that are at issue. The "three dimes" story is significant because it is said to be representative of an overall culture. Those problems do seem to persist over time, as in the case of Michael Little (is he well regarded these days in the OBC, after having been regarded as a very good leader and Zen master?).

It seems reasonable from this point of view to hope this institution will reflect on these issues and learn from its history moving forward, for its own sake, for the sake of those with any connection to it, and for the sake of the Dharma.

An excerpt from Strathern's response to Sara H's recent posts at OBC connect:

You argue that JK was giving a final teaching out of compassion; my experience of her attitude towards a number of leavers was that she was fond of final 'teachings' that showed her superiority and caused nothing but turmoil to the taught. I've seen people leaving in this kind of situation on a number of occasions and under a number of circumstances, and seen them handled well and handled badly, sometimes even vindictively. I fear JK veered towards the latter.

chisanmichaelhughes' follow up comment:

And these actions along with the actions of other disgraced 'teachers' were actions of incredible cruelty.This cruelty was indeed handed down to Eko, who would make his followers live one way whilst he lived by a different set of rules,he forbade his followers certain aspects of normal life ,whilst he indulged himself. Until he ( along with the disgraced teachers) were caught with their hands down their pants.

The more I look through the OBC connect site the more I think that the OBC is a pathological organization, and that its pathology fully reflects the character of its founder. Attempting to minimize the cruelty of Kennett's behavior in the three dimes story by calling it a mistake is ridiculous, especially since it was obviously premeditated and typical for her.

Through Dzogchen we can really understand what God is and we don’t have to worry if there is a God or not. God always exists as our real nature, the base, for everybody. - Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

How does the current climate at Shasta Abbey differ from when Jiyu-Kennett was in charge?Perhaps we are judging them harshly based on past, and that should be tempered by looking at the current situation?

What has been posted about Jiyu Kennet here reminds me of a lot of the Theosophy stuff propagated by Blavatsky (for a reason unknown to me,Theosophy is still rather popular in the Netherlands where I am living at the moment). Perhaps Jiyu-Kennett was influenced by some of the theosophyprinciples regarding visions during meditation and contact with Holy Beings?

JKhedrup wrote:How does the current climate at Shasta Abbey differ from when Jiyu-Kennett was in charge?Perhaps we are judging them harshly based on past, and that should be tempered by looking at the current situation?

What has been posted about Jiyu Kennet here reminds me of a lot of the Theosophy stuff propagated by Blavatsky (for a reason unknown to me,Theosophy is still rather popular in the Netherlands where I am living at the moment). Perhaps Jiyu-Kennett was influenced by some of the theosophyprinciples regarding visions during meditation and contact with Holy Beings?

Perhaps she was as cracked as Blavatsky?

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed GyalpoThe Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

JKhedrup wrote:When these things "come up", we need to speak with a realized teacher. We cannot only rely on appearances, even if they seem to arise in a state of meditation.

In terms of past lives, I've given up on tracing back, as Shakespeare, Guinevere, Cleopatra, Napoleon, Genghis Khan and Jimi Hendrix have already been claimed. So better to focus on trying to cultivate something less sexy, like developing the wish to be liberated from samsara or compassion for sentient beings.

I don't think many Buddhist practitioners actually cultivate the remembrance of past lives. But it is a by-product of practise. Sure, it may be "just an experience". But so is breaking your leg. A broken leg is still an experience of some trauma and reconstitution that demands a certain level of attention and priority assigned to it to manage it skilfully. Past lives can be like that. Others more of a "a ha, well that it explains that, I guess."

Nothing worth creating an enduring narrative over, but at the same time, not so worthless it shouldn't demand some attention when it comes up either. There is a lot of potential for healing pent up psychic and even physical trauma stored in the bodymind through such remembrances. That in itself makes it worth paying a bit of attention to, regardless of how real they may be (myself, I tend to think of past lives as inherited fictions. Albeit, fictions with inherited consequences too).

"Even if my body should be burnt to death in the fires of hellI would endure it for myriad lifetimes As your companion in practice" --- Gandavyuha Sutra

Thing with the past life rememberance is that people always claim to have been somebody of importance during their past life. You rarely hear of people remembering being a scum sucking peasant, or remebering their past 100,000 lives as a cockroach. Wouldn't that be more cathartic?

Anyway, I do not give so much weight to the whole "past lives recollection" deal, it is (more than) enough (effort) for me to look (mindfully) at this life, in order to understand my brain dead stupidity in my past lives! Of course there must have been some merit too, but judging from my circumstances, bucketloads of demerit is more likely.

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed GyalpoThe Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

JKhedrup wrote:When these things "come up", we need to speak with a realized teacher. We cannot only rely on appearances, even if they seem to arise in a state of meditation.

In terms of past lives, I've given up on tracing back, as Shakespeare, Guinevere, Cleopatra, Napoleon, Genghis Khan and Jimi Hendrix have already been claimed. So better to focus on trying to cultivate something less sexy, like developing the wish to be liberated from samsara or compassion for sentient beings.

I don't think many Buddhist practitioners actually cultivate the remembrance of past lives. But it is a by-product of practise. Sure, it may be "just an experience". But so is breaking your leg. A broken leg is still an experience of some trauma and reconstitution that demands a certain level of attention and priority assigned to it to manage it skilfully. Past lives can be like that. Others more of a "a ha, well that it explains that, I guess."

Nothing worth creating an enduring narrative over, but at the same time, not so worthless it shouldn't demand some attention when it comes up either. There is a lot of potential for healing pent up psychic and even physical trauma stored in the bodymind through such remembrances. That in itself makes it worth paying a bit of attention to, regardless of how real they may be (myself, I tend to think of past lives as inherited fictions. Albeit, fictions with inherited consequences too).

admittedly not the most rigorous scientific source, but good enough as a stopgap for the present. My point is that there may be a material basis for the kinds of behaviors we see described here: visions and revelations from "Cosmic Buddha," growing a lotus out of your head... Kennett was ill and her illness was not addressed properly. Who is responsible for that?

JKhedrup wrote:How does the current climate at Shasta Abbey differ from when Jiyu-Kennett was in charge?Perhaps we are judging them harshly based on past, and that should be tempered by looking at the current situation?

What has been posted about Jiyu Kennet here reminds me of a lot of the Theosophy stuff propagated by Blavatsky (for a reason unknown to me,Theosophy is still rather popular in the Netherlands where I am living at the moment). Perhaps Jiyu-Kennett was influenced by some of the theosophyprinciples regarding visions during meditation and contact with Holy Beings?

She was part of the London Buddhist Society scene, which at that time was shot through with Theosophical concepts...the LBS was started by Christmas Humphreys as a Buddhist " Lodge" of the Theosophical Society. He was a great admirer of Blavatsky.I was never really drawn to Zen apart from my early enthusiasm for all things Buddhist, but the only Zenny person that impressed me from those days was Myo-kyoni ( Irmgard Schleugal ) ( spelling ? )who seemed like the real thing, at least to my untutored eyes. And who was not at all Blavatsky-ish.

Last edited by Simon E. on Thu May 02, 2013 6:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

" My heart's in the Highlands my heart is not here.My heart's in the Highlandschasing the deer."

JKhedrup wrote:What has been posted about Jiyu Kennet here reminds me of a lot of the Theosophy stuff propagated by Blavatsky (for a reason unknown to me,Theosophy is still rather popular in the Netherlands where I am living at the moment). Perhaps Jiyu-Kennett was influenced by some of the theosophyprinciples regarding visions during meditation and contact with Holy Beings?

Regarding the theosophy connection James Ishmael Ford had this to say on the "Spear of Destiny" thread:

I think she was always fascinated with the occult. If I reconstruct her early years correctly her early Buddhism really was Christmas Humphreys' highly occult-theosophical version. While I'm inclined to believe her visions were induced by untreated diabetes, I think much of the content dates from her time with Humphreys...

Through Dzogchen we can really understand what God is and we don’t have to worry if there is a God or not. God always exists as our real nature, the base, for everybody. - Chögyal Namkhai Norbu

Simon E. wrote:She was part of the London Buddhist Society scene, which at that time was shot through with Theosophical concepts...the LBS was started by Christmas Humphreys as a Buddhist " Lodge" of the Theosophical Society. He was a great admirer of Blavatsky.

admittedly not the most rigorous scientific source, but good enough as a stopgap for the present. My point is that there may be a material basis for the kinds of behaviors we see described here: visions and revelations from "Cosmic Buddha," growing a lotus out of your head... Kennett was ill and her illness was not addressed properly. Who is responsible for that?

It is also quite possible for it to be both. I imagine there are also many schizophrenics who are both schizophrenic and having actual visions. A nasty cocktail.

I am not an expert, but my impression of reading some of these accounts is of someone with some depth to her having visions and remembrances and, lacking received learning and and/or proper guidance on how to navigate such things, was having to come up with her navigational tools for it. As a rampant diabetic, she might not have been well positioned for that.

Maybe the "cosmic buddha" was a mahasattva of some sort, which she named as "cosmic Buddha". That buddhist practitioners should have such encounters shouldn't be terribly surprising to one who takes the mahayana sutras a little bit literally. But I can well imagine that the diabetes and so forth would make such a person liable to misinterpretation and overreliance on such visions and voices. Without proper guidance or a very still and de-agendafied mind (for lack of a better word), the boundaries between genuine 'channelling', intuition and just plain imagination can end up getting quite blurred. And relying on it to such a degree so as to consult on choices of cars and sharing such things with others totally unfiltered suggests at best a rather naive approach to managing such things, more probably self-taught skill dealing with such phenomena having veered into delusional territory as well.

I suspect many such things are a product of visions filtered through various lenses of delusion. That is in itself not a big deal. Unless you are a mahasattva, it seems to me hard to avoid. The key point is whether they are useful or not. But once you starts taking such appearances very literally and rely on them without more than a few grains of salt with regards to their accuracy, it can become a potent cocktail for wild tales, even if they are wild tales somewhat rooted in the real thing.

I don't know how true any of that is of Kennet. Not my business to say really either. Just spitballing on the topic based on what is being written.

"Even if my body should be burnt to death in the fires of hellI would endure it for myriad lifetimes As your companion in practice" --- Gandavyuha Sutra

Greg,As i mentioned I am a bit surprised Theosophy survives as well as it does here in the Netherlands.

I guess back in Blavatsky's time, things were not translated, the world was not globalized, Christianity was still the dominant paradigm. But now, with translations available, senior masters teaching in the West, and better general knowledge about Eastern traditions I have no idea why people would choose the Blavatsky mish mash route, but some do.

As for the importance of the past lives, if it is a genuine experience it is significant, but I feel in many cases it is projection. I think we are up to three Guiniveres by now. In the traditional Gelug and Theravada circles with which I am familiar it is seen in poor taste to talk about such experiences at length and in public, except for maybe a vague hint.

No matter what our past lives were, if we don't have realizations, they probably are not worth bragging about.

Simon E. wrote:I was never really drawn to Zen apart from my early enthusiasm for all things Buddhist, but the only Zenny person that impressed me from those days was Myo-kyoni ( Irmgard Schleugal ) ( spelling ? )who seemed like the real thing, at least to my untutored eyes. And who was not at all Blavatsky-ish.

JKhedrup wrote:I guess back in Blavatsky's time, things were not translated, the world was not globalized, Christianity was still the dominant paradigm. But now, with translations available, senior masters teaching in the West, and better general knowledge about Eastern traditions I have no idea why people would choose the Blavatsky mish mash route, but some do.

I just put it down to karma viapakka. It makes perfect sense to me.

"My religion is not deceiving myself."Jetsun Milarepa 1052-1135 CE

"Butchers, prostitutes, those guilty of the five most heinous crimes, outcasts, the underprivileged: all are utterly the substance of existence and nothing other than total bliss."The Supreme Source - The Kunjed GyalpoThe Fundamental Tantra of Dzogchen Semde

Theosophy was part of the general milieu of her class and time, which emphasized the Transcendental, the Eternal, the Ideal, the Esoteric. Think of Aurobindo, the English Idealists, J. Cousins & AE. Educated people at that time found the notion of the "perennial philosophy" very appealing indeed. It's a product of the time and place and (let's be honest, bourgeois) social circumstances.

How does the current climate at Shasta Abbey differ from when Jiyu-Kennett was in charge?Perhaps we are judging them harshly based on past, and that should be tempered by looking at the current situation?

I was never really drawn to Zen apart from my early enthusiasm for all things Buddhist, but the only Zenny person that impressed me from those days was Myo-kyoni ( Irmgard Schleugal ) ( spelling ? )who seemed like the real thing, at least to my untutored eyes. And who was not at all Blavatsky-ish.

Actually the London Buddhist Society and Humphreys thought so too.Irmgard Schloegl was invited by the Society to teach Zen in the UK - if i remember correctly when Humphreys died his house became a training temple.